Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
You have to see this thread at Free Republic about a school in Malta called the Accelerated Christian Academy that teaches young earth creationism. Accelerated, you say? Well of course. Just look at what their director says is taught:
But the curriculum of the Accelerated Christian Academy in Mosta is not exactly free of such fanciful reinventions of history. Fenech reiterates the basic Evangelist tenet that the entire universe was created in 4004 BC... and this time, he also supplies "proof". "When man landed on the moon (in 1969), they expected the landing module to sink in a deep layer of dust. But the layer was only a few inches deep. This proves that the universe is still young!"
Of all of the young earth "proofs" this may be the single most ridiculous. Apparently, NASA was not only stupid but the men aboard the Apollo spacecraft were suicidal. According to the absurd measurements cited by creationists, the dust layer on the moon was expected to be hundreds of feet thick. That would mean they "expected" the lander to sink so deep it would never get back out.
But wait...maybe NASA isn't so stupid. Maybe, just maybe, they actually knew long before men ever landed on the moon that there was only a thin layer of interstellar dust on the moon. Maybe they got that information from the multiple unmanned lunar landers that were sent up by the U.S. and the Soviet Union years before the manned mission went up. After all, that was the purpose of sending up those unmanned landers, to send back information about the moon to help us plan the manned missions. Ya think?
But my favorite part of the article is when Fenech, the head of this "accelerated" school, says that the dinosaurs were alive with human beings and helped the Egyptians build the pyramids. No, seriously:
This is the word of Vince Fenech, Evangelist pastor and director of a fully licensed, State-approved Creationist institution which admits children aged between four and 18. "Of course the 'dinoceros' existed (as Fenech pronounces the word). It is mentioned in the Book of Job. They were used to help build the pyramids," he says, adding that this latter observation is only "his personal belief", and that it does not form part of the school's curriculum.
I'll wait for you all to stop giggling....
Ready?
Please don't forget to read the comments. I love the argument about how ancient drawings that look like dinosaurs proved they must have lived with dinosaurs. Yet we don't live with dinosaurs today and we draw pictures of them all the time. Amusing.
Politics
Comments
Well, if you believe in a young earth, then, yes, everything must be accelerated--hence, accelerated education.
Posted by: James Hanley | August 27, 2008 9:38 AM
Even creationist sites such as "Answers in Genesis" admit the moon dust argument is a load of crap. Or, as they put it, "no longer useful".
Posted by: Taz | August 27, 2008 9:44 AM
Oh, Ed, that's not remotely the stupidest argument. I don't even know how one would pick the stupidest age-of-the-earth argument among such a plethora of riches. My personal favorite, though, is a toss up between two gems from Henry Morris.
The first is the river inflow argument. Morris read a paper estimating how much of different elements were washed into the ocean each year by rivers. He then took the amount of those elements currently in the ocean and divided it by the inflow to determine how many years it would take for the oceans to be filled to their current levels. Using this astounding technique on dozens of different materials suspended in the ocean, he arrived at times ranging from a mere 100 years for aluminum to 260 million years for sodium. Now, a normal man, confronted with such a wide range of dates, might conclude that the dating method chosen didn't work for some reason. Not Henry Morris! He got all excited because Nickel worked out to be about the "correct" age. Amazing! Proof positive that the earth is young!
The second argument is when Morris assumes a constant population growth of .5% would take the human population from about two people 4000 years ago to our present numbers. Creationists have an endless habit of assuming the fundamental constants of the universe (like radioactive decay rates) are variable, while asserting variables are constants. The really fun part of this argument is assuming it's true and seeing how often the Bible lies as a result. For instance, at the time of the Exodus, there were fewer people alive on Earth by Morris's calculation than who actually left Egypt according to the Bible. There were only 13 people on the entire planet when the pyramids were built as well. Amazing!
Posted by: Michael Suttkus, II | August 27, 2008 9:46 AM
Young earth creationists also argue that Tyrannosaurs were plant eaters before the fall. The fact that the jaws and dentition of Tyrannosaurs were totally unfitted for eating plants troubles them not at all. Of course, if the pyramids were constructed after the fall, the notion that meat eating Tyrannosaurs were around at the same time as humans and assisted in pyramid construction boggles the imagination.
Posted by: SLC | August 27, 2008 9:50 AM
My favorite is that there is actually a continuous documented history, Egypt for example, that goes back right through "the flood." For some reason they don't mention the flood. Now one might argue, "of course they don't mention the flood, they were busy drowning!" Problem is, the cultures don't show any sign of even slowing down, let alone everyone dying and new people moving in!
Posted by: dogmeatib | August 27, 2008 10:11 AM
SLC:
That's easy: Coconuts!
T. rex ate coconuts...
e.g. http://www.scientificblogging.com/fish_feet/t_rex_ate_coconuts
Posted by: imsd | August 27, 2008 10:17 AM
My understanding is that lunar regolith is quite a few metres deep, but is pretty well packed down. Wikipedia confirms this. Not that we'd expect YECs to actually do a modicum of research.
Posted by: Adrian | August 27, 2008 10:30 AM
My vote for dumbest creationist argument is "any event with p
Posted by: Anonymo | August 27, 2008 10:42 AM
OK, that got cut off. Should read:
My vote for dumbest creationist argument is "any event with probability less than one in one thousand will never occur".
Posted by: Anonymo | August 27, 2008 10:46 AM
Egypt for example, that goes back right through "the flood."
during the time frame of a fundie I know, Egyptians were building above ground tombs out of clay. Researchers are finding out a lot about those times from these tombs that didn't wash away during the flood. it was a miracle! as for miracles, I was a witness, remember JC turning water into wine, at a recent party I turned beer into piss (all night long)
Posted by: richCares | August 27, 2008 10:54 AM
The dinasores helped built the peeramids? I don't think so, T. Rex couldn't even hold a measuring tape, never mind a hammer.
Posted by: democommie | August 27, 2008 11:18 AM
Worring about dust on the moon is nothing, We should all worry about sand on the beach - Who knows how deep that stuff is!
When I read about dinosaurs helping to build the pyramids, I instantly thought of Fred Flintstone on his dinosaur working in the quarry. Maybe this guy is confusing cartoons for reality.
P
Posted by: Mr P | August 27, 2008 11:18 AM
And "why are there still monkeys?"
Posted by: U.O | August 27, 2008 11:24 AM
Re imsd
The only problem with the T Rex ate coconuts hypothesis is that the creationists have not produced any evidence that trees bearing coconuts existed everywhere that T Rex (and its cousins, e.g. Albertosaurus) fossils have been found.
Posted by: SLC | August 27, 2008 11:25 AM
But... I thought the pyramids were built long before 4004 BC? I'm confused. I did see that Mammoths helped build them though - watched 10,000 BC, an accurate historical drama if I've ever seen one.
Democommie ... now I'm going to have Meet the Robinsons in my head all day! "I have a big head and little arms. I'm just not sure how well this plan was thought through."
Posted by: Andrea | August 27, 2008 11:29 AM
For some big time YEC fun, check out YEC Headquarters. They actively attack AiG for being too scientific. I kid you not.
I think my favorite YEC silliness is that because the AIDs virus mutates so rapidly, if evolution were true AIDs would be walking upright and taking our jobs by now, or something like that.
Though this one is pretty good too: To be able to say someone is lying about creation, you'd first have to know all there is to know on the subject. There's only one person that knows, the Creator Himself.
Posted by: Abby Normal | August 27, 2008 11:32 AM
PYGMIES + DWARFS!
Posted by: Dunc | August 27, 2008 11:34 AM
Ohhh, I love this game! My favorite creationist argument has to be the explanation for how light from stars billions of light years away has reached the Earth in less than 6000 years. You see, the speed of light was *much* faster in the past and then before the time we were able to measure its speed accurately, for no apparent reason, via some unknown mechanism, and without any other effects, it slowed down to its present speed. How convenient! And then, let's completely disregard all the obvious consequences a million times faster speed of light would have had.
Posted by: MyPetSlug | August 27, 2008 11:35 AM
I wonder if these Creationist types think "Dinotopia" is real?
Posted by: CHV | August 27, 2008 11:40 AM
>>>I love the argument about how ancient drawings that look like dinosaurs proved they must have lived with dinosaurs.
I seem to recall this being one of Kent Hovind's fave theories that dinosaurs and people co-existed (e.g. depictions of dragons across various cultures).
When's Ken getting out of prison again? I should check his jailhouse blog, and see if he's up for parole yet.
>>>Yet we don't live with dinosaurs today and we draw pictures of them all the time.
Well, technically, we do live among some species (crocs, gators, ancient fishes, crabs, sharks) which did live in the dinosaurian age.
Posted by: CHV | August 27, 2008 11:48 AM
I personally love the way they state that evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics, then act like they won the debate by saying something that no scientist has ever thought of.
Of course, listening to them try to explain where all the water for the flood came from is amusing as well.
Posted by: Foster Disbelief | August 27, 2008 11:48 AM
Well, technically, we do live among some species (crocs, gators, ancient fishes, crabs, sharks) which did live in the dinosaurian age.
Well, I'm not sure how many actual *species* of these groups existed during the Mesozoic. There were definitely sharks, crocodyliforms, fish, and crabs around during that time, but I don't know of any *species* of these groups which have persisted anywhere near 70 plus million years.
The only problem with the T Rex ate coconuts hypothesis is that the creationists have not produced any evidence that trees bearing coconuts existed everywhere that T Rex (and its cousins, e.g. Albertosaurus) fossils have been found.
T. rex is known from the Hell Creek and Lance formations (and a few other units that crop out in western North America). Fossil palms have been found within those formations. I don't know about coconuts. I'm not a paleobotanist, but as far as I know, coconut-like remains only date back around 15-18 million. That's a pretty good gap between 18Ma and 65Ma, where the last tyrannosaurids die out. But since there are Arecaceae fossils known from western North America in the latest Maastrichtian from at least some of the same sequences that have produced T. rex material, it certainly isn't impossible. Now, the dentition, well, this is where the creotards start acting like creotards...
Posted by: Josh | August 27, 2008 1:03 PM
"Accelerated Christian Academy"? No - this is the Retarded Christian Academy.
Besides, everyone knows that it was mammoths which helped build the pyramids - the movie 10,000 BC proved that....
Posted by: Ian | August 27, 2008 1:32 PM
Ya know? If you accept the argument of the 'new earth' folkses, then it does come to us that the entire enormous, vast body that is known as humankind -- all 6 billion of us -- first emerged from a single couple called Adam and Woman (if we are to believe the moron who is quoted in this story as to what she was called). When the gene pool became disastrously compromised (see the royal families of Europe for a good look at what inbreeding does), there was this great, big flood -- and all 6 billion of us are NOW the scions and scionesses of Noah and his unnamed wife! Who was also probably called Woman! I would propose this theory: The creationists and "new Earth" folkses are the result of this inbreeding, with all of the completely disastrous effects which this has had on what remains of their brains. The rest of us evolved in a process which took several billion years. Perhaps the creationists and "new Earth" folkses will eventually evolve to the point of intelligent beings themselves. I'm not holding my breath. Certainly not about this person in Malta.
Posted by: eeuropean2000 | August 27, 2008 2:38 PM
One of my favorites is the expanding Earth theory, and as a bonus it comes with a practical experiment you can do yourself at home!
You prepare by making cardboard cutouts of all the major continents and blowing up a round balloon just over half-way. Then you stick all the continents on the balloon in their approximate real positions so they all fit like a spherical jigsaw puzzle. (Interesting how they all seem to fit quite nicely, right?) Then just blow the balloon up to full size and, "Hey, presto!" all the continents are separated by oceans just as they are today!
That proves, of course, that before "Da Flood" the Earth was much smaller than it was today.
When I saw a local creationist doing this on our cable access T.V., I just fell about laughing, and I believe you can still find examples of this experiment on YouTube.
Posted by: tacitus | August 27, 2008 3:24 PM
I'm surprised to see this sort of idiocy transpiring in Malta, which is predominantly Catholic (hardly a remedy against irrational thinking, I know, but the RCC does not officially endorse young Earth creationism).
Posted by: Sadie Morrison | August 27, 2008 3:53 PM
CHV: When's Ken getting out of prison again? I should check his jailhouse blog, and see if he's up for parole yet.
About 2015, according to the Bureau of Prisons Inmate Locator. And remember - no parole in the federal system. Darn!
Posted by: JDB | August 28, 2008 11:55 AM
The pyramids? Eric Idle showed that the dinsosaurs built Stonehenge. He used little models that proved it was true.
Yep. Dinosaurs have been excellent helpmates for giant engineering projects for centuries. The tasks they performed in Bedrock were amazing, and if you have kids in your life, you may have seen the toyset called, "BC Builders."
Posted by: Spike | August 28, 2008 12:14 PM
The Flintstones had a pet dinosaur. End of debate. I win.
Posted by: Andrea | August 28, 2008 2:41 PM
MyPetSlug:
Ohhh, I love this game! My favorite creationist argument has to be the explanation for how light from stars billions of light years away has reached the Earth in less than 6000 years. You see, the speed of light was *much* faster in the past and then before the time we were able to measure its speed accurately, for no apparent reason, via some unknown mechanism, and without any other effects, it slowed down to its present speed. How convenient! And then, let's completely disregard all the obvious consequences a million times faster speed of light would have had.
I'm not a cosmologist, but I play one on TV...
I'm fairly sure that some of these numbnuts responsible for that particular argument would make a ridiculous appeal to Einstein; after all, gravity bends light in the General
Theory, correct?
Even as a blatantly obvious layman, there are two problems I can think of right off the bat: for one, although light is bent by gravity, it hardly means that the speed of light is changed to any real degree except in the case of black holes and (possibly) dark matter. Secondly, if there was such a shift, the effect of gravity implies a slowing of light's speed, not its speeding up, either in the past or the present.
If the butchered General Theory argument doesn't work, it'll be amusing to see how far they go down the Goddiddit path to prove that some completely unmeasurable force was at work when the speed of light pulled a slick one on all of us, physicists included.
Posted by: Chris Krolczyk | August 28, 2008 7:42 PM
Umm, my understanding is that gravity does not bend light, it bends *space*. The light still travels straight, but the space itself is bent.
...darth
Posted by: darth | August 29, 2008 12:06 AM
Totally agree with all above. Just one question -
What was the Flintstone's pet dinosaur called?
Answer me that. -DJ
PS Didn't they have a tame Smilodon too (who refused to sleep outside, as I recall)?
Posted by: DingoJack | August 29, 2008 12:45 AM
No, Dino, down Dino!
Sorry I just remembered. Thanks anyway. -DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | August 29, 2008 1:00 AM
Actually, no. The first pyramid was built during the reign of Djoser, which began around 2630 B.C.
Posted by: noncarborundum | August 29, 2008 4:21 AM
Well Chris, general relativity is self-contradictory anyway. Under Einstein's model, motion is relative. While sitting there reading this, are you moving? The answer depends on the reference frame. Relative to the Earth, no you're not. But relative to the Sun you're orbiting at 30 km/sec. Relative to center of the galaxy you're circling at 200 km/sec, and the galaxy itself is moving at 300 km/sec relative to other local galaxies. Speed is relative, hence the name of the theory.
Now whatever your reference frame, nothing can travel faster then the speed of light, about 300,000 km/sec. This is illustrated by the now famous formula, E=MC^2. As you approach the speed of light you either need zero mass or infinite energy. But consider for a moment a light bulb. When you turn it on it emits photons, or light as we more commonly think of it. By definition, the photons wiz away from the bulb at the speed of light. But lets consider two photons, labeled A and B in the following diagram. I'll use a question mark to represent the light bulb.
AB
Relative to the light bulb they are traveling at Einstein's limit. But change the reference frame and they are traveling at twice the speed of light relative to each other. Twice the speed of light is impossible based on Einstein. But you can easily see that it happens all the time. Therefore Egyptians used Brontosaurus like cranes.
Posted by: Abby Normal | August 29, 2008 9:50 AM
Darn, the diagram was supposed to look like this:
A<~~~?~~~>B
Posted by: Abby Normal | August 29, 2008 9:54 AM
Abby Normal:
Relative to the light bulb they are traveling at Einstein's limit. But change the reference frame and they are traveling at twice the speed of light relative to each other. Twice the speed of light is impossible based on Einstein. But you can easily see that it happens all the time. Therefore Egyptians used Brontosaurus like cranes.
...and the founding fathers approved of a phrase in the Pledge of Allegiance authored in 1954.
Is Jack Chick here with the vampire repellant yet?
Posted by: Chris Krolczyk | September 2, 2008 8:33 PM
Andrea:
The Flintstones had a pet dinosaur. End of debate. I win.
You've been warned.
From Wikipedia:
(baseball player Carl) Everett is an outspoken man, and his remarks have proven controversial on several occasions.
Perhaps the best-known of these was his denial of the existence of dinosaurs. He was quoted as saying, "God created the sun, the stars, the heavens and the earth, and then made Adam and Eve. The Bible never says anything about dinosaurs. You can't say there were dinosaurs when you never saw them. Somebody actually saw Adam and Eve. No one ever saw a Tyrannosaurus rex." He also derided fossils of dinosaur bones as man-made fakes. In reference to these comments, Boston Globe columnist Dan Shaughnessy dubbed Everett "Jurassic Carl." Everett, in turn, referred to Shaughnessy as the "curly-haired boyfriend" of Globe beat writer Gordon Edes, a nickname which stuck after ESPN columnist Bill Simmons started incorporating it into his work. In Seattle, he was known as C-Rex, a name given him by writers for the Mariners blog U.S.S. Mariner.
Wacky, no?
Granted, the first time I heard about any of this crap was when local [Chicago] sports radio smartass Dan Bernstein - who wouldn't find the word "smartass" an insult - brought it up. Granted, Everett was a player on the White Sox team that won it all in 2005, which means he was useful at least once in his life, but that doesn't mean he doesn't have...issues. And no, I'm not forgetting the alleged childbeating and more obvious homophobia "issues" that the wikipedia piece mentions, either.
Posted by: Chris Krolczyk | September 2, 2008 8:49 PM
darth:
Umm, my understanding is that gravity does not bend light, it bends *space*. The light still travels straight, but the space itself is bent.
I stand corrected.
Now when in the hell is Jack Chick gonna get here with the vampire repellant, for crying out loud?
(Go ahead; Google it. I double-dares ya.)
Posted by: Chris Krolczyk | September 2, 2008 8:59 PM